4 ms·

I'm not actually the person who made the first statement. But as I see it, he made 2 statements: 1. Stated (as fact) that there is a fundamental difference be

I'm not actually the person who made the first statement. But as I see it, he made 2 statements: 1. Stated (as fact) that there is a fundamental difference between copyright infringement and physcal theft. 2. Expressed dismay at the apparent lack of understanding of the above fact by the music / movie industries. Expressing dismay because someone else seems unaware of something you hold as a fact is not a logical fallacy in and of itself. It may be possible to show the fact is incorrect and the dismay therefore unnecessary, but that doesn't make it a fallacy.

raganwald 17y ago
I agree with the way you have broken the statement up. Begging the question is not so much a logical fallacy as a tautological argument. The issue is that item 1 is not so much stated as assumed en passant. It's kind of like asking "When did you stop beating your wife." The statement is couched as being about point number two, but if we say either "yes, there are music executives who understand" or "no, you're wrong, no music executives understand," either way we are forced to agree with the first point. For the record, I agree with both points, but I also acknowledge that the matter is subject to debate.
- daveungerer 17y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question I quote: This fallacy is often confused with begging the question, which offers a premise no more plausible than, and often just a restatement of, the conclusion. It does become a loaded question if you ask a music industry exec: "Are you aware of the fundamental difference between copyright infringement and stealing?" But, as the wikipedia article says, that's not the same as begging the question. In any case, it's not a loaded question, since it's not a question to begin with. The original poster did not ask us to answer the question about the record / film industry, while accepting his other statement. He was saying "I believe that there is a fundamental difference between X and Y, and am dismayed by the lack of understanding of this difference in the record / film industry". I doubt he had formal logic in mind. EDIT: But you do make some very points, and I'm willing to concede that I may be completely wrong about what the original guy was trying to say, or how it should be interpreted. I really should spend less time on HN :)
  - raganwald 17y ago
    Perhaps it is a loaded statement :-) Thanks, I learned something from your points and research.
    - daveungerer 17y ago
      Yeah, learned something too. Thanks.

raganwald 17y ago

I agree with the way you have broken the statement up. Begging the question is not so much a logical fallacy as a tautological argument. The issue is that item 1 is not so much stated as assumed en passant. It's kind of like asking "When did you stop beating your wife." The statement is couched as being about point number two, but if we say either "yes, there are music executives who understand" or "no, you're wrong, no music executives understand," either way we are forced to agree with the first point. For the record, I agree with both points, but I also acknowledge that the matter is subject to debate.

daveungerer 17y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question I quote: This fallacy is often confused with begging the question, which offers a premise no more plausible than, and often just a restatement of, the conclusion. It does become a loaded question if you ask a music industry exec: "Are you aware of the fundamental difference between copyright infringement and stealing?" But, as the wikipedia article says, that's not the same as begging the question. In any case, it's not a loaded question, since it's not a question to begin with. The original poster did not ask us to answer the question about the record / film industry, while accepting his other statement. He was saying "I believe that there is a fundamental difference between X and Y, and am dismayed by the lack of understanding of this difference in the record / film industry". I doubt he had formal logic in mind. EDIT: But you do make some very points, and I'm willing to concede that I may be completely wrong about what the original guy was trying to say, or how it should be interpreted. I really should spend less time on HN :)
- raganwald 17y ago
  Perhaps it is a loaded statement :-) Thanks, I learned something from your points and research.
  - daveungerer 17y ago
    Yeah, learned something too. Thanks.